|
Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG
(Post 1076790)
jaykris,
Status quo under the RLA basically means both sides will continue to abide by the CBA during section 6. Neither side can attempt to influence the negotiations through actions outside the scope of the current CBA. The TPA is basically a 3 way agreement that attaches itself to the individual CBA's. Both sides are bound by it. While I doubt anyone would debate the fact UCH 's invoking the "partial termination" provision would not be change and perhaps influence negotiations, it would not be a change in the "status quo" since the TPA is an agreed to addition to the CBA for conduct during the merger transition. Any actions mgmt takes within the latitude provided them is not a violation. Sucks, huh! Lee |
Originally Posted by flybynuts
(Post 1076498)
F
1. They will pay industry standard. Not a penny more or less. Delta and American is our competition and soon he believes they will remove American from the comparison when they get done making cuts. Southwest is a different animal and we could pay their 737 rates but it would come out of wide body rates. There is money in the budget for pilot pay raises but how to spread it around is the issue. Staffing is the big hurdle. Once you get staffing the rest of the contract would go fast. If staffing requires 10% more pilots then those additional pilot costs come out of the hourly rates available. The company wants to staff efficiently and use the money for hourly rates. The union wants more bodies on the property. 2. We are finally going to charge more than is costs for a ticket. We are going to make a little money in the bad times and kick A** in the good times. 3. He wants the 70 seat RJ’s because of the 1st class demanded by high paying customers. He is not sure we even need 90 seat jets. 5. Profit Sharing for the CAL pilots will be used as leverage at the table. (the checkairman personally thinks we will get it based on the tone of the profit sharing discussions at the meeting.) |
Disregard post #43..
|
[QUOTE=MXDUDE;1076912]
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 1076889)
Everyone seems to forget this. SWA pilots are paid the most because they are the most efficient. UAL will have X amount of dollars to pay enough pilots for the company. We can either be more efficient and make more money (like SWA), or be less efficient and make less money (like we currently do). The company is fine either way. They care about the bottom line. It is our choice which one we are more interested in.
One of my favorite phrases of wisdom is to always try and understand a problem from the other person's point of view. I think everyone needs to understand this before completely shooting down the need for 70 seat jets. I am all for profit sharing. I would much rather have some sort of control over how much money I would make. I think management would be more interested in paying pilots more when they are doing well, and less when the company is not doing so well. This would help discourage the work slowdowns and ****ing away of efficiency we have noticed more and more. Ask a SWA pilot how much they see this happen over there. And yet we all wonder why they make more money. |
Originally Posted by fireman0174
(Post 1076880)
Does the TPA have some sort of "drop dead" date listed within the agreement?
13-A. Partial Termination. Unless the Parties agree otherwise, the Airline Parties may jointly terminate the provisions of Sections 4-D (Domiciles), 7-A (Furlough with regard to United Pilots only), 7-C (Flying Ratios), 7-D (Domicile and Base Protection), and 9 (ALPA Travel), individually or collectively, at any time on or after December 31, 2011, if the parties have not reached a tentative agreement on a JCBA by that date. Lee |
WN pilots more "efficient"? Incestial breeding hog excrement.
CAL 777 pilots at one time flew EWR-HKG-EWR as a 3 day trip with an 18 hour layover at the airport. PBS (the value of which was intentionally way understated by management and tremendously under valued by CAL negotiators that caved on Contract '02) builds every line to minimize needed "man days". This past summer I was able to bid more consecutive days off in a row than I have ever been awarded on a month where PBS puts work days immediately adjacent to vacation time. The key difference is, that the WN pilots are paid incrementally more for additional effort. Our current management expects that effort for no additional compensation and in some cases they try to demand it for nothing, or resort to intimidating it out of pilots. |
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
(Post 1076924)
WN pilots more "efficient"? Incestial breeding hog excrement.
CAL 777 pilots at one time flew EWR-HKG-EWR as a 3 day trip with an 18 hour layover at the airport. PBS (the value of which was intentionally way understated by management and tremendously under valued by CAL negotiators that caved on Contract '02) builds every line to minimize needed "man days". This past summer I was able to bid more consecutive days off in a row than I have ever been awarded on a month where PBS puts work days immediately adjacent to vacation time. The key difference is, that the WN pilots are paid incrementally more for additional effort. Our current management expects that effort for no additional compensation and in some cases they try to demand it for nothing, or resort to intimidating it out of pilots. |
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
(Post 1076924)
Our current management expects that effort for no additional compensation and in some cases they try to demand it for nothing, or resort to intimidating it out of pilots.
The current management does not have to intimidate anyone for additional flying. It is done happily, willingly, and with great gusto by numerous VJMs, CAs in right seat, and pilots who have simply given up on the collective. Much of it is done on days off with straight pay. Through short staffing, natural disaster, and poor planning the current management knows one thing, and one thing alone--the on time checks are still deposited into employee accounts last month, this month, and every month. |
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 1076889)
Everyone seems to forget this. SWA pilots are paid the most because they are the most efficient. UAL will have X amount of dollars to pay enough pilots for the company. We can either be more efficient and make more money (like SWA), or be less efficient and make less money (like we currently do). The company is fine either way. They care about the bottom line. It is our choice which one we are more interested in..
|
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 1076889)
One of my favorite phrases of wisdom is to always try and understand a problem from the other person's point of view. I think everyone needs to understand this before completely shooting down the need for 70 seat jets.
|
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 1076889)
am all for profit sharing. I would much rather have some sort of control over how much money I would make. I think management would be more interested in paying pilots more when they are doing well, and less when the company is not doing so well. This would help discourage the work slowdowns and ****ing away of efficiency we have noticed more and more. Ask a SWA pilot how much they see this happen over there. And yet we all wonder why they make more money.
|
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 1076889)
Everyone seems to forget this. SWA pilots are paid the most because they are the most efficient. UAL will have X amount of dollars to pay enough pilots for the company. We can either be more efficient and make more money (like SWA), or be less efficient and make less money (like we currently do). The company is fine either way. They care about the bottom line. It is our choice which one we are more interested in.
One of my favorite phrases of wisdom is to always try and understand a problem from the other person's point of view. I think everyone needs to understand this before completely shooting down the need for 70 seat jets. I am all for profit sharing. I would much rather have some sort of control over how much money I would make. I think management would be more interested in paying pilots more when they are doing well, and less when the company is not doing so well. This would help discourage the work slowdowns and ****ing away of efficiency we have noticed more and more. Ask a SWA pilot how much they see this happen over there. And yet we all wonder why they make more money. Wow. You have completely derailed |
IAHFLR;
So UCAL schedules me to fly 95 hours a month, and I work 18 days. SWA guys fly the same hours in 13 days. They should get paid more because they are more "efficient"? Maybe the extra hotel money and per diem is given to them? The days of flying 500 hours a year are gone for most airline pilots. Vacation drop is gone, never to return. If we are all flying 90+ hours a month, where is the efficiency that SW pilots are being paid extra for? I don't get it. Please enlighten me. |
UCAL pilots are paid less because we ACCEPTED being paid less. When push came to shove, and the company told us our jobs were on the line, we blinked.
Pure and simple. The company now knows that we will always "blink". We have no negotiating power left, and never will until some group of airline pilots grows a pair and fights back. Since both UAL and CAL pilots have been without a contract for 2+ years, it appears that it won't be us. |
Nine years ago, when the big airline bankruptcies took off after 9/11, me and another UAL pilot had a few beers and talked about the future of the industry, and where the jobs would end up, pay and benefit wise. We made a little side bet.
I thought that the "limit" of pay cuts would be 130 and hour for a narrow body captain and 80 for an FO. My buddy guessed 100 Captain/65 FO. We both based it on the same thing - when the pay got to a certain point, so many FO's would quit they wouldn't be able to staff their cockpits. I now think that we were both wrong. The pay is approaching 100 Capt/65 FO when corrected for 9 years of inflation. And nobody is quitting. How low will we go? Who knows. Look at the recall numbers. |
Originally Posted by Probe
(Post 1077206)
IAHFLR;
So UCAL schedules me to fly 95 hours a month, and I work 18 days. SWA guys fly the same hours in 13 days. They should get paid more because they are more "efficient"? Maybe the extra hotel money and per diem is given to them? The days of flying 500 hours a year are gone for most airline pilots. Vacation drop is gone, never to return. If we are all flying 90+ hours a month, where is the efficiency that SW pilots are being paid extra for? I don't get it. Please enlighten me. |
Originally Posted by Probe
(Post 1077226)
Nine years ago, when the big airline bankruptcies took off after 9/11, me and another UAL pilot had a few beers and talked about the future of the industry, and where the jobs would end up, pay and benefit wise. We made a little side bet.
I thought that the "limit" of pay cuts would be 130 and hour for a narrow body captain and 80 for an FO. My buddy guessed 100 Captain/65 FO. We both based it on the same thing - when the pay got to a certain point, so many FO's would quit they wouldn't be able to staff their cockpits. I now think that we were both wrong. The pay is approaching 100 Capt/65 FO when corrected for 9 years of inflation. And nobody is quitting. How low will we go? Who knows. Look at the recall numbers. |
Originally Posted by MXDUDE
(Post 1077446)
But what has been created is a mass population pool up to their eyeballs in debt trying to maintain their middle class lifestyle. Mgmt knows this. We have become a society of indentured servants.
|
Originally Posted by flyingfarmer:1076337
If this all pans out as is possible i.e. DEN737, IAH320, etc. I wonder how many "paid" moves this would cause on both sides of the house?
|
When is Smilton going to be in Denver?
|
Originally Posted by Daytripper
(Post 1076316)
I want to stay in IAH on the 73, but you're telling me that I'm going to be kicked out and replaced by high cost labor?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:28 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands